Top Secret Letter To Jabba The Congresswoman
By Mitch Berg
To: Rep. Liz Krueger (D-NY)
From: Mitch Berg, Uppity Peasant
Re: Your Plan
Rep. Krueger
Sssssh. This is just between you and me.
Rep. Liz Krueger (D-NY)
Last week in Congress, you suggested people “infiltrate the NRA”.
Brilliant plan. I found the double-dog secret gateway that leads into the inner sanctum. Here it is. Please make sure you share this only with trusted agents of the Big Plan.
Remember – we’ve always been at war with the NRA
That is all.
June 20th, 2016 at 6:24 am
When did Michael Moore’s sister move to New York?
June 20th, 2016 at 6:28 am
Jeezuz, Mitch. Was that really necessary?
June 20th, 2016 at 6:35 am
I like the way that she does her nails.
C’mon, if you can’y say something nice about a person, don’t say anything at all.
June 20th, 2016 at 7:20 am
Good point.
Nice nails.
June 20th, 2016 at 7:26 am
wait till she finds out that being a voting member of the NRA requires more than the $40/yr regular membership fee. When she does she’ll be back to the trough for govt supplied community organizing grant money cause I’m willing to bet there’s no way she or any of her ilk will cough up the $1,500.00 Life Membership fee out of their own pockets. Maybe if we advertised that it would give them the chance to vote against Oliver North And Ted Nugent. The other alternative would be to convince Bloomberg to fund 20,000 new life memberships.
June 20th, 2016 at 8:53 am
“Congressperson Krueger? There’s some guy on the line who says he is from ISIS and he wants to talk to you about working together to disarm Americans.”
“PUT ‘Em THROUGH!”
June 20th, 2016 at 8:59 am
Mitch,
Once again, let’s demean women by focusing on her weight in your title. I think her proposal is an anathema and do not support it but I think we can disagree without focusing on her appearance in a very sexist way. Did people routinely talk about Dick Armey as being Jabba the Speaker? Not in my recollection. I’m no pro-PCer, but you diminish your argument by making it about appearance rather the issue.
So, here’s two things for you to consider.
1. The NRA doesn’t support (neither do I) the idea of arming people at a bar. Liquor+Guns=stupid^1000. Plus there was an armed cop there, so this wasn’t a “gun free zone” unless we’re crazy enough to think arming people who are drinking is what we want to do.
2. SCOUTS just upheld the CT law (as they did the Highland Park law) by declining to take the challenge. So, again, a ban (with grandfathering) on high cap magazines and weapons which accept them which fire one round per trigger pull without out any other manual action, would be entirely constitutional. While the NRA would oppose this utterly because selling “military looking” weapons makes people feel “tough”, they aren’t necessary for self-defense to a degree that outweighs their negatives (meaning they really aren’t needed at all but the 1 or 2 lives which have been saved over the past 20 years don’t outweigh the 200 taken by them). So, given that you appear ready to part with the NRA and say that people in bars should be armed, are you willing to part with the NRA and agree that after 2 consecutive upholds of bans on certain types of weapons, that such bans are constitutional? If not, why not? Given you have Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, Roberts on the court, making it at worst a conservatively balanced court, why not? Are you claiming they aren’t deciding properly? Based on what? The point is, it’s not the NRA that is the issue or the problem excepting that they prevent laws like the CT law from being passed, the point is that it is SCOTUS who decides, and who HAS decided, if such bans are constitutional, and they are. At this point the only thing necessary to do is to embarrass the dinosaurs and chickens in Congress into doing what should have been done when the Brady bill expired, fully ban assault weapons which can accept external magazines and ban the magazines themselves. They do not meet the constitutional standard as being needed and they do far more harm than good. It won’t happen this time because people are being distracted into stupid “no fly, no buy” arguments, but it will eventually happen. Maybe at that point our love affair with guns will have come to an end. One can hope (not you) but me and hundreds of millions of other Americans, we can hope that we can eventually break the tyranny of the minority.
June 20th, 2016 at 9:46 am
The left seems to think the NRA is some super secret all-powerful organization that controls the Republican party.
But then I think NAMBLA controls the Democrat party (and not the South Park NAMBLA).
June 20th, 2016 at 10:47 am
Pen,
I set the trap.
As predicted, you (or DG) walked into it.
Let’s snap it shut:
Once again, [Huh? – Ed] let’s demean women by focusing on her weight in your title.
So its baaad to riff on a liberal congresswoman’s weight.
But who was it who said just last week…:
“they weren’t allowed in because they were white, old, or overweight”
“some fat old angry white guy walks in…”
Let’s not go pleading “insensitivity”, Pen.
June 20th, 2016 at 10:55 am
Back to business:
Did people routinely talk about Dick Armey as being Jabba the Speaker?
Did you ever read the lefty blogosphere?
1. The NRA doesn’t support (neither do I) the idea of arming people at a bar. Liquor+Guns=stupid^1000. Plus there was an armed cop there, so this wasn’t a “gun free zone” unless we’re crazy enough to think arming people who are drinking is what we want to do.
Wayne LaPierre doesn’t set law by decree.
And in many states – including Minnesota – it’s legal for permittees to carry a firearm, provided their blood alcohol content is below .04 – half the legal limit to drive. Every carry permit instructor I’ve ever met will tell you that means “don’t drink and carry”. And while I neither confirm nor deny that I own or carry any firearms (they’re scary!), if I did, and went to a bar, I’d go for the social life and the club soda and lime. Most anyone with a carry permit will likely do the same. Of course, there are other people carrying in bars – but they’re not bothering with permits, training or background checks.
Design review coming up. More, maybe, later.
June 20th, 2016 at 10:57 am
Peevish
your website is constantly berating people because they are the wrong religion, the wrong sex, the wrong race, too old,and yes overweight. for you to get your Victorian knicker in a bunch and play the bigotry card is vastly amusing because your website is possibly the most bigoted site I visit. You and your blog sty-mate are both bigots of the first order.
June 20th, 2016 at 11:21 am
I dunno, she looks more like a Wormtail’s twin separated at birth than Jabba. And based on the rhetoric, she is scarier than her other brother, Freddy.
June 20th, 2016 at 11:33 am
I’m not totally familiar with the inner workings of the NRA, but I would be surprised if you could simply get your life membership or whatever and credibly start endorsing anti-gun initiatives–I bet they have a constitution that would force anti-gun workers to get a very strong supermajority of voters and a vote of all members to get that done.
In other words, I’d bet that the organization, like the nation itself, has a 2nd Amendment.
Regarding the question of the congress-woman’s weight, sorry, but this woman needs to be shamed. Due to a total lack of self-control (which ought to be a disqualifying factor for political office), she’s left Dick Armey in the dust long ago and her only political peer in this regard is Jefferson Davis Hogg.
June 20th, 2016 at 11:38 am
Busy today, don’t have time to rebut all Pen’s talking points, but just off the top of my head:
Penigma chiding Mitch for incivility in political discourse is the pot calling the kettle African-American.
An armed police officer OUTSIDE the bar says nothing about how many guns are permitted to be carried INSIDE the bar. In this case, the answer is “none” making the bar area into a zone free of guns; i.e. a gun-free zone, just like most recent massacre sites.
Armed people go to bars all the time: they’re cops, they’re off-duty, and they’re armed. They know their drinking limits. They’re careful. Their bars are safe from robbers. Gun safety is not about geography, it’s about mental attitude. There’s nothing special about the air inside a bar that makes a gun more or less likely to go off. Alcohol limits make sense; geographical limits do not.
The Supreme Court is a political institution. The justices play politics in deciding which cases to hear, waiting for a case with good facts to support their interpretation of the law. Both sides do it. The fact that a particular case was not accepted does not necessarily mean the Court approved of the result, it means the justices didn’t think their side could win using those facts. The legal effect is the bad ruling stands, but only until the right case comes along. So no, I’m not willing to say the ban is constitutional.
June 20th, 2016 at 11:38 am
Peevish,
here’s a direct quote from your website:
In the absence of anyone caring about them one way or the other, much less being important enough to rob or otherwise pay attention to them, we see the usually white and old, flabby and crabby crowd doing things like this,
this is the kind of bigoted bilge your website churns out –
1)bigoted against whites
2)bigoted against old people
3)bigoted against overweight people
Peevish see Matthew 7:3-5
June 20th, 2016 at 11:46 am
“One can hope (not you) but me and hundreds of millions of other Americans, we can hope that we can eventually break the tyranny of the minority.”
Interesting you bring up tyranny in the context of the Second Amendment, Pen. Federalist 46 says the Founders intended an armed citizenry is to be able to resist the tyranny . . . of the federal government. For the citizenry to have a fighting chance, they’d need to have access to the same military equipment that the federal tyrants are using to oppress them. Justice Scalia once speculated the logical conclusion of the Founder’s intent would extend the Second Amendment to fully automatic rifles and man-portable rockets. People who argue that “assault rifles” aren’t “necessary” generally fail to ask “necessary for what purpose?”
June 20th, 2016 at 12:33 pm
Say peevee? Couple of things for you:
1. That woman worked HARD to transform herself into the hog that was hiding inside her. Who the hell do you think you are to deny her the dignity of being recognized for the beady eyed swine she identifies as?
2. So you want to play “the meaning of is” with the bill of rights? I’m your Huckleberry.
I don’t think real Americans should have to suffer leftist babbling. A strip of duct tape over your yapper does not infringe on your right to say what you want, and protects rational people from having to suffer your ignorant, mendacious diatribes.
Sound good?
June 20th, 2016 at 2:19 pm
It strikes me that duct tape over the yapper solves two of her problems, doesn’t it?
June 20th, 2016 at 6:04 pm
Sorry, Pen!
When you’ve got Moochelle Obumbler controlling school lunches because kids are getting obese, don’t you think that fat slob Democrats should be setting an example? Of course you don’t, because all of you libidiots are such pathetic hypocrites!
June 20th, 2016 at 6:15 pm
When people say auto-loading rifles are not “needed,” they rarely articulate what they’re not “needed” for. Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves and lush agricultural land – it should be richer than Saudi Arabia. They’re looting stores for food now, and historically, the next target will be “hoarders” meaning people like me who planned ahead by filling the pantry. When the mob comes, calling 911 will not suffice, nor will the single-shot .22 rifle. What’s that? Economic collapse cannot happen here? Already has, several times, and we’re overdue.
June 21st, 2016 at 12:54 pm
One can hope (not you) but me and hundreds of millions of other Americans, we can hope that we can eventually break the tyranny of the minority.
The fact that the vast majority of states have WILLINGLY enacted shall-issue carry laws in the last couple of decades, shows that the anti-gun orcs are the minority, not human rights defenders. The orcs still control DC, California, and Illinois, and hence have had to have their asses spanked by SCOTUS like the whining little brats/bullies they are.